Canadians off work due to a disability are facing a perfect storm – they need time to recover, but instead of focusing on their health, they’re often dealing with the financial stress of trying to make ends meet and the emotional stress of being away from work.
Author Archives: Admin2
Study shows improved winter road safety should save lives
One of the safeguards in place for those who have suffered personal injuries in car accidents and who have been wrongly denied a benefit is the ability to file a claim in the Ontario courts against their insurance company. It is an important right to have – although there are other methods of disputing an insurance company’s denial of a benefit in a personal injury claim (such as through the dispute resolution procedure at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario, or FSCO.)
Latest data on the volume of cases for mediation and arbitration at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario
Works out to be roughly 525 applications for mediation hearings each week and an additional 181 arbitration applications per week in 2015. This works out to 141 applications for mediation or arbitration every business day of 2015.
For January of 2016 there have been 685 applications for mediation every week and 184 applications for arbitration a week. That works out to be 173 applications for mediation or arbitration each and every business day of January 2016. FSCO Med-Arb-Timelines 2007-Jan 2016
WSIB and auto insurance: Birds of a feather
At the same time that the WSIB is under fire, the Ontario Trial Lawyers Association has called on the Ontario government to conduct a public inquiry into the state of independent medical examinations of injured auto accident victims. The OTLA refers to medical experts who “distort evidence … in a bid to satisfy insurance company clients” which causes “unconscionable delays and unfair denial of coverage.” http://www.torontosun.com/2016/02/13/wsib-and-auto-insurance-birds-of-a-feather
FAIR comment on Ontario AIDRS Proposal
According to the Financial Services Commission there were over 3,000 applications for mediation and arbitration hearings every month or 136 applications for hearings every business day in 2015 (Jan-Sept). This is an extremely high number of unresolved disputes and denied claims and likely more than a newly created system would be able to accommodate efficiently. According to these numbers Ontario’s auto insurance disputes are on the same trajectory as discussed in the Ontario Ombudsman 2011 report with half of all claims denied and a system bogged down and bottlenecked.
OTLA Submission To CPSO Transparency Phase 2 Feb 12 2016
It has been and continues to be OTLA’s position that public protection and safety are the cornerstones for transparency and accountability.
It was this belief in transparency and accountability that lead OTLA to call for a public inquiry into the quality of medical evidence used in court. Too many motor vehicle accident victims find that they are victims as well of a system of medical assessments that are tailored for partisan purposes and permitted to flourish in a climate of secrecy and a lack of accountability.
OTLA Submission to CPSO Transparency Phase 2 Feb 12 2016
FAIR submission to CPSO re transparency
For many auto accident victims their biggest obstacle to recovery is the CPSO members who are the third party vendors of medical opinion evidence for Ontario’s auto insurers. Whether it is auto insurance MVA claims, WSIB claims, Long Term Disability claims or Canada Pension Plan Disability claims, what Ontario’s medical opinion ‘experts’ say in their reports and testimony can have a profoundly negative effect on recovery outcomes for very seriously injured individuals.
Pilotte v Gilbert, 2016 ONSC 494 (CanLII)
[2] This matter has endured a long and convoluted history in the 22 years since the accident occurred in 1993. It culminates in this five-week trial in which the plaintiff claims compensation for accident benefits which she argues she would have received but for the negligence of the defendant, Ian D. Kirby (Kirby). She claims damages against Kirby and his law firm Gilbert, Wright & Kirby, Barristers and Solicitors (the law firm), for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty, claiming millions of dollars in damages, including interest.
[643] There is no question of the severity of the plaintiff’s injuries resulting from the 1993 accident. The sad reality is that, as a result, Julie’s condition has produced some serious permanent and lasting sequelae which may be subject to further deterioration in the future. It is evident that the actions of Julie, her parents, her sister and her husband Paul have been supportive, well-meaning and diligent in many respects throughout Julie’s journey towards recovery.
[644] The issue before this Court, however, is a narrow one: Was the defendant, Ian Kirby, negligent in the handling of the plaintiff’s case? The evidence has led this Court to conclude that he was not.
[645] Thus, for the reasons stated above, the action of the plaintiff as against Ian D. Kirby and his law firm, Gilbert, Wright, & Kirby, Barristers and Solicitors, is dismissed
FAIR Submission to the 2016 PRE-BUDGET CONSULTATIONS
Claimants have long known about the deceptive nature of claims handling in Ontario. It’s time that our legislators and law-makers acknowledge Ontario’s insurance industry fraud, whether it be an adjuster, an assessor, assessment centers, treatment facility or the insurer themselves whose policies support or encourage swindling legitimate claimants out of the coverage they paid for.
FAIR submission to the Pre-budget Consultation February 2 2016